Film Review — Oppenheimer

Cillian Murphy is Oscar-worthy in Christopher Nolan’s gripping and devastating atomic bomb drama.

Much has been written about the epic nature of Christopher Nolan’s films. The Dark Knight, Interstellar, Dunkirk, and others are all known for their must-see-in-IMAX vastness, primarily for their immersive action sequences. Yet here, what Nolan and cinematographer Hoyte Van Hoytema demonstrate most powerfully is the other vital reason to see a film on the biggest screen possible: The immersive, intimate drama of what takes place on the face of a great actor. In this case, Cillian Murphy.

Murphy’s portrayal of the scientist most directly responsible for the development of the atomic bomb, J Robert Oppenheimer, is now an early frontrunner for the Best Actor Oscar. In depicting this multi-layered, complex, enigmatic character, Murphy gives a tour-de-force performance. He renders with immense subtlety the nuances of a compelling and conflicted historical figure without resorting to scenery chewing histrionics. There’s a claustrophobic, slightly panicky way in which he imagines sub-atomic realms in early scenes, seeing beyond this world. But as is pointed out, with such abilities, there’s always a price to pay.

At once brilliant but possessed of a darker, even potentially murderous side (the notorious poisoned apple incident from his youth at Cambridge is briefly covered), Murphy’s Oppenheimer is seen in three Nolan-esque intermeshing timelines; two in colour (captioned “Fission”), from his point of view, and a third in monochrome (captioned “Fusion”), from the point of view of embittered American Atomic Energy Commissioner Lewis Strauss (a superb supporting role for Robert Downey Jr). Strauss’s bid to join Eisenhower’s cabinet in the 1950s intercuts with Oppenheimer’s wartime appointment to the Manhattan Project by Lieutenant General Leslie Groves (Matt Damon, also excellent), and Oppenheimer’s post-World War II struggle against having his security clearance revoked in view of past communist associations. This investigation is engineered with Machiavellian precision by Strauss after Oppenheimer clashes with him and humiliates him over arms race policy.

As one would expect from Nolan, his dramatisation of Kai Bird and Martin Sherwin’s book American Prometheus features no attempt at dumbing down the subject matter. This isn’t really a biopic. We see nothing of Oppenheimer’s childhood. Nor are there condescending date or location captions, or footage of the real people over the end credits (a trend that has become tediously ubiquitous). Nolan treats his audience like intelligent grown-ups; something for which I have always been profoundly grateful. A Mount Everest of scientific information and historic background is gleaned from the dialogue, but although the film is often confined to a lot of talking in rooms, the dramatic fire holds throughout the long but gripping three-hour running time.

Visual and audio motifs add cinematic vibrancy. These include shots of splashing raindrops that look like miniature blast waves, and sounds of stomping feet that punctuate Oppenheimer’s later immensely unsettling breakdowns and hallucinations. Jennifer Lame’s contribution is worth mentioning here, as Oppenheimer’s disturbed state of mind is brilliantly demonstrated in her editing choices.

The assembling of the scientists for the Manhattan Project, and the explanations given for the minutiae of Oppenheimer’s plan, at times reminded me of the first hour of Inception, in which the characters explain the rules of the dream world. Less familiar (for a Nolan film) are the sexual elements showing Oppenheimer’s womanising, specifically his affair with Communist party member Jean Tatlock (Florence Pugh). His relationship with his wife Kitty (Emily Blunt) is also an important element of the narrative. The different plot strands are interwoven tighter and tighter, building to a truly devastating climax that leaves one drained and emotionally exhausted.

Other members of the cast making excellent contributions include Benny Safdie as Edward Teller (the man who inspired Dr Strangelove), Kenneth Branagh as Oppenheimer’s mentor Niels Bohr, and Tom Conti in a small but pivotal role as Albert Einstein. There are also key parts for the likes of Jason Clark, Rami Malek, Alden Ehrenreich, Jack Quaid, Macon Blair, Josh Hartnett, David Krumholtz, Olivia Thirlby, David Dastmalchian, Casey Affleck, and Gary Oldman. The latter contributes a particularly waspish performance as President Truman, who notoriously dismissed Oppenheimer’s confession that he had blood on his hands by stating he was a “cry-baby scientist”.

Ludwig Göransson contributes a propulsive score, and we also get an astonishing, CGI-free recreation of the Trinity bomb test, courtesy of Nolan’s visual effects supervisor Andrew Jackson. In fact, there isn’t a single CGI shot in this film. The bomb detonations and visions of nuclear destruction are depicted through entirely analogue means.

I have read some minor criticism elsewhere on a few fronts. First, the decision not to show the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombs or their aftermath (or indeed any Japanese perspective) has been quibbled about by some. Personally, I think that story is best told in a different film. Adding that would have diluted the incredibly intense focus on Oppenheimer’s point of view, and his guilt-ridden reaction to that horrific event.

Second, some have claimed not enough was made of Oppenheimer being Jewish. Again, I disagree. I think the film keeps the anti-Semitism question where it needs to be, particularly when Oppenheimer astutely notes how that issue will be a thorn in the side of Hitler and his scientists.

Thirdly, some have critiqued the film as giving short shrift to its female characters. This is arguably true (although Emily Blunt gets a standout scene fiercely confronting Jason Clark’s intimidating lawyer), but again, giving Blunt or Florence Pugh — both of whom are excellent — more screen time could have compromised the focus on Oppenheimer’s perspective and, more crucially as the film unfolds, his mental state. I think what these criticisms really boil down to are an understandable desire to see a bigger picture. There may be other films to be made about these fascinating events that shine a light on areas not covered here.

One criticism I initially thought I’d have about the film would be potential audience confusion with Nolan’s usual narrative jiggery-pokery. But whilst perhaps one has to mentally adjust in the first few minutes, I think Nolan’s bag of tricks serves the subject matter well, as the treatment reflects the conflicted mind of its protagonist. I suppose one could argue it’s a bit too sombre in places, but it isn’t entirely without humour. There’s a nice chalk-and-cheese banter between Damon’s no-nonsense General Groves, and the arrogant, eccentric Oppenheimer. At one point the latter refers to “humble scientists”, to which Groves dryly remarks he’s yet to meet one.

Overall, this is stunningly powerful, horribly sobering stuff. Yet the film’s great strength is it doesn’t politicise or editorialise. It is neither explicitly pro nor anti-nuclear. Instead, it depicts both Oppenheimer’s enthusiasm for the project and his subsequent misgivings about the resultant arms race. It shows his successes and failures, triumphs and mistakes, professionally and personally. The debate among top brass as to whether the bomb should be dropped on Japan, for and against, is shown without judgement. Nor does the film take a position about what might have been, but instead allows the audience to draw their own conclusions.

Given the current war in Ukraine and recent developments with AI, this subject matter seems more relevant than ever. Is because-we-can ever a good enough reason to play God? Should breakthroughs in technological development be unilaterally shared among nations to avoid Cold War scenarios? Or is such thinking naïve and unworkable? In either case, whether Oppenheimer was right or wrong in what he did at the time, the threat of nuclear annihilation still lurks like a dark shadow over the entire world. This film is a compelling, deeply alarming reminder of that reality.

Oppenheimer comes with my highest recommendation not just as a riveting, incisive, brilliant piece of cinema, but as a thought-provoking work of art that asks vitally important questions about the future of the human race. Do go and see it.

(Originally published at Simon Dillon Books.)

If you’re a not a Medium member and want unlimited access to my work (and that of numerous other talented writers) click here to upgrade to full Medium membership. This is an affiliate link. I receive financial incentives for new referrals, so sign-ups are hugely appreciated. Thank you.

The Dillon Empire beyond Medium

Can I tempt you with exclusive previews of my short stories and novels? Or do you just want to see awkward videos of me attempting to provide writing updates whilst my son adds snarky captions? If so, click here to check out my Patreon page.

For a full list of my published novels, click click here.

For more on my novels and other projects, click here for my blog.